GeForce MX130 vs 8800 Ultra

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8800 Ultra with GeForce MX130, including specs and performance data.

8800 Ultra
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 171 Watt
1.55

MX130 outperforms 8800 Ultra by a whopping 182% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking962667
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.6610.67
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameG80GM108
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 May 2007 (17 years ago)17 November 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$829 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores612384
Core clock speed612 MHz1122 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1242 MHz
Number of transistors681 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)171 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate39.1729.81
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPS0.9539 TFLOPS
ROPs248
TMUs3224

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1080 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth103.7 GB/s40.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

8800 Ultra 1.55
GeForce MX130 4.37
+182%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

8800 Ultra 642
GeForce MX130 1814
+183%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD6−7
−200%
18
+200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p138.17no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7
+0%
7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Fortnite 32
+0%
32
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 15
+0%
15
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 23
+0%
23
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35
+0%
35
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 3
+0%
3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21
+0%
21
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+0%
14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16
+0%
16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how 8800 Ultra and GeForce MX130 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX130 is 200% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.55 4.37
Recency 2 May 2007 17 November 2017
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 171 Watt 30 Watt

GeForce MX130 has a 181.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 470% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX130 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 Ultra in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8800 Ultra is a desktop card while GeForce MX130 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra
GeForce 8800 Ultra
NVIDIA GeForce MX130
GeForce MX130

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 31 vote

Rate GeForce 8800 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2345 votes

Rate GeForce MX130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8800 Ultra or GeForce MX130, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.